On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 20:17 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > Slightly different. More like updates and updates-tested. Something > you might opt-into after your machine was working the way you want and > you don't want to take unnecessary chances. But it might be even better > to have some sort of per-package risk rating that would go down with age > unless problems were reported and a per-client choice of how > bleeding-edge to go. And packages being pushed to fix security or > serious known problems could be added with a negative risk rating if the > packager is sure that it will make things better instead of worse. Given that we have a hard enough time keeping things straight and getting feedback for updates-testing, what makes you think we'll do a better job by adding a 3rd repo into the mix? And what are 3rd party repos supposed to target? -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
